W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2014

Re: [whatwg] new constructor method for Path2D

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 14:54:19 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDASa5MfTy26eNc+gyD9U-NO4mRmnwmWTZniqG_5mUDJsA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Jeff Muizelaar <jmuizelaar@mozilla.com>, "whatwg@whatwg.org" <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Jeff Muizelaar wrote:
> > On Mar 5, 2014, at 5:34 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> > >>
> > >> To work around this, we could add a couple of constructor methods to
> > >> the 2D context:
> > >>
> > >> Path2D createPath();
> > >>
> > >> Creates a new empty Path object [...]
> > >
> > > This used to be how many Web APIs worked, but over the years we've
> > > received enormous volumes of feedback to the effect that
> > > constructor-based APIs are way better than factory-based APIs. Is
> > > there no way we could at least have all the canvases within a Document
> > > in Firefox use the same backend? It would be really unfortunate to
> > > have to use factories here to get around an implementation detail in
> > > one browser.
> >
> > The choice of backend depends on the size of the canvas. So it wouldn't
> > be easy to have all canvases within a document use the same backend.
>
> Ah, ok.
>
> This makes a factory method somewhat less useful, because what if the
> canvas changes size later? Do all the paths have to be "re-bound"?


for optimal performance, yes.
Rescaling a canvas is not that common of a scenario though.

Maybe this hint would be useful for Chrome since they switch to software
under certain circumstances too
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2014 22:54:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:17 UTC